Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Open Medicine

formerly Central European Journal of Medicine

Editor-in-Chief: Darzynkiewicz, Zbigniew


IMPACT FACTOR 2018: 1.221

CiteScore 2018: 1.01

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.329
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.479

ICV 2017: 152.94

Open Access
Online
ISSN
2391-5463
See all formats and pricing
More options …
Volume 12, Issue 1

Issues

Volume 10 (2015)

Delirium risk of dexmedetomidine and midazolam in patients treated with postoperative mechanical ventilation: A meta-analysis

Wang Peng
  • Department of Anesthesiology, 5th Central Hospital of Tianjin, Peking University BinHai Hospital 300450 Tianjin China
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Shan Shimin
  • Corresponding author
  • Department of Anesthesiology, 5th Central Hospital of Tianjin, Peking University BinHai Hospital 300450 Tianjin China
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Wang Hongli
  • Department of Anesthesiology, 5th Central Hospital of Tianjin, Peking University BinHai Hospital 300450 Tianjin China
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Zhang Yanli
  • Department of Anesthesiology, 5th Central Hospital of Tianjin, Peking University BinHai Hospital 300450 Tianjin China
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Zhang Ying
  • Department of Anesthesiology, 5th Central Hospital of Tianjin, Peking University BinHai Hospital 300450 Tianjin China
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
Published Online: 2017-08-10 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/med-2017-0036

Abstract

Objective

To evaluate by meta-analysis the effects of dexmedetomidine versus midazolam on postoperative delirium in patients that received postoperative mechanical ventilation.

Methods

The electronic databases of PubMed, Web of Science, EMbase, CNKI, CBM, Cochrane library and WanFang were searched by two reviewers. All the clinical studies related to dexmedetomidine versus midazolam on postoperative delirium were screened and collected in this meta-analysis. The combined postoperative delirium risk between dexmedetomidine and midazolam groups was pooled by random effect model. The publication bias was assessed by Begg’s funnel plot and Egger’s line regression test.

Results

A total of six studies including 386 subjects (202 in the dexmedetomidine group and 184 in the midazolam group) were finally included in this meta-analysis. All six studies reported adequate sequence generation. Three studies used blindness methods and 2 publications were free of selective reporting. However, only 1 publication reported allocation concealment. Because of significant heterogeneity across the studies (I2=61.7%, p<0.05), the data were pooled by random effect model. Pooled data showed the postoperative delirium risk in the dexmedetomidine group was significantly lower than that of the midazolam group (RR=0.20 (095%CI:0.09~0.47, p<0.05)).The Begg’s funnel plot showed obvious asymmetry at the bottom and Egger’s line regression test also indicated significant publication bias (t=-6.51, p<0.05).

Conclusion

Compared with midazolam, patients that received dexmedetomidine for postoperative mechanical ventilation sedation had less risk of developing delirium.

Keywords: Dexmedetomidine; Midazolam; Postoperative mechanical ventilation; Delirium; Meta-analysis

1 Introduction

Patients who receive major surgery are at increased risk of developing postoperative delirium as the result of, the administration of anesthetic agents and postoperative mechanical ventilation sedation [1,2]. Dexmedetomidine and midazolam are generally used for postoperative mechanical ventilation in patients who received major surgery. Several studies have compared the postoperative delirium risk for dexmedetomidine and midazolam in patients treated with postoperative mechanical ventilation [3-5]. Maldonado and his colleagues [3] conducted a prospective randomized controlled clinical trial to investigate the effects of postoperative sedation on the development of delirium in patients undergoing cardiac-valve procedures. Three postoperative sedation drugs were used: dexmedetomidine, propofol, or midazolam. They found that postoperative sedation with dexmedetomidine was associated with significantly lower rates of postoperative delirium and lower care costs. However, because of the small sample size and different surgery procedures, the conclusion was not conclusive. In our present meta-analysis, we searched the databases for all potential studies related to the comparison of delirium risk for dexmedetomidine and midazolam in patients treated with postoperative mechanical ventilation.

2 Materials and methods

2.1 Publications identification

The electronic databases of Pubmed, Web of Science, EMbase, CNKI, CBM, Cochrane library and Wanfang were searched by two reviewers (Wang Peng and Zhang Ying). All the clinical studies related to dexmedetomidine versus midazolam on postoperative delirium were screened and collected in this meta-analysis. The publication search words were “dexmedetomidine”, “midazolam”, “delirium” AND “mechanical ventilation” as Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) and corresponding free text words.

2.2 Inclusion, exclusion criteria and data extraction

The inclusion criteria for this meta-analysis were: 1) clinical controlled trial study types; 2) patients treated with dexmedetomidine or midazolam for postoperative mechanical ventilation sedation; and 3) outcome of the included studies should include the incidence of delirium. The exclusion criteria were: 1) case report or review study type; 2) duplicated publications; 3) using other drugs for postoperative mechanical ventilation sedation; and 4) studies without enough data to calculate the postoperative delirium incidence rate.

2.3 Quality assessments

The methodological qualities for the 6 studies chosen were assessed by two authors (Wang Peng and Sha Shimin) according to the Cochrane Reviews Handbook with a six-item questionnaire:1)adequate sequence generation? 2)allocation concealment? 3)blinding? 4)incomplete outcome data addressed? 5)free of selective reporting? And 6) free of other bias? If the paper addressed the item, the quality assessment was marked with “Yes” for low risk. If the paper did not address the item, the quality assessment was marked with “No” for high risk.

2.4 Statistical analysis

Review Manager 5.0 and STATA/SE 12.0 were used to do all statistical analysis. Statistical heterogeneity among the included 6 publications was evaluated by chi-square (χ2) test, and the inconsistency was demonstrated by I2. If statistical heterogeneity existed (χ2, p<0.1 or I2>50%), the random-effect model (Dersimonian-Laird method) was used to pool the data. Inversely, without significant heterogeneity among the included studies, the fixed-effect model was used to pool the data. The publication bias was evaluated by Begg’s funnel plot and Egger’s line regression test.

3 Results

3.1 Studies’ characteristics

After searching the databases, a total of six studies [3-8] including 386 subjects (202 in the dexmedetomidine group and 184 in the midazolam group) were included in the final meta-analysis. The publication searching flowchart is shown in Figure 1. The paper publication years range from 2009 to 2013 with a minimum sample size of 20 and a maximum sample size of 100. The general characteristics of included studies are shown in Table 1.

Publication searching flow-chart
Figure 1

Publication searching flow-chart

Table 1

General information of included studies

3.2 Quality evaluation of each study

All of the six studies reported adequate sequence generation.Three3 studies used blindness methods and 2 publications were free of selective reporting. However, only 1 publication reported allocation concealment. The general methodological qualities of the included 6 studies are shown in Figure 2.

General quality of the included 6 studies.( “+/Yes” for low risk; “-/No” for high risk; “?” for moderate risk)
Figure 2

General quality of the included 6 studies.( “+/Yes” for low risk; “-/No” for high risk; “?” for moderate risk)

3.3 Statistical heterogeneity

The statistical heterogeneity across the 6 studies was evaluated by chi-square (χ2) test, and the inconsistency was demonstrated by I2. Significant statistical heterogeneity was found across the studies with chi-square of 13.05 (I2=61.7%, p<0.05).

3.4 Meta-analysis

Because of significant heterogeneity across the studies, the data was pooled by random effect model. Pooled data showed the postoperative delirium risk in dexmedetomidine group was significantly lower than that of the midazolam group (RR=0.20(95%CI:0.09~0.47, p<0.05), Figure 3).

Forest plot of postoperative delirium risk between dexmedetomidine and midazolam group
Figure 3

Forest plot of postoperative delirium risk between dexmedetomidine and midazolam group

3.5 Sensitivity analysis

Sensitivity analysis was performed by omitting each of the included studies. The results showed that the RR was not changed significantly by omitting each of the studies. This indicated the meta-analysis results were stable and not sensitive to any one of the 6 studies, Figure 4.

Forest plot of sensitivity analysis
Figure 4

Forest plot of sensitivity analysis

3.6 Publication bias

Publication bias was assessed by Begg’s funnel plot and Egger’s line regression test. The Begg’s funnel plot showed obvious asymmetry at the bottom (Figure 5) and Egger’s line regression test also indicated significant publication bias (t=-6.51, p<0.05).

Begg’s funnel plot for evaluation publication bias
Figure 5

Begg’s funnel plot for evaluation publication bias

4 Discussion

Postoperative delirium is common in patients who received postoperative mechanical ventilation sedation. Postoperative delirium is known as an acute organic mental syndrome which has been shown to affect up to 80% of patients who received postoperative mechanical ventilation or treated in intensive-care units (ICU) [9]. As has been reported, the risk factors for delirium included elderly age, sleep deprivation, metabolic abnormalities, alcohol or drug abuse and postoperative sedation [10, 11]. Several studies had reported that the development of postoperative delirium can increase the risk of morbidity, mortality, postoperative complications, and prolong the time of hospitalization [12]. Dexmedetomidine and midazolam are two kinds of drugs commonly used for postoperative mechanical ventilation sedation [13-15]. The risk of developing delirium with these two drugs was not completely clear. Several studies compared the postoperative delirium risk for dexmedetomidine and midazolam in patients treated with postoperative mechanical ventilation. Maldonado JR [3] and his colleagues reported a prospective randomized controlled trial comparing the postoperative delirium risk for patients that received dexmedetomidine, propofol or midazolam for postoperative sedation. They found that the incidence of postoperative delirium were 3% and 50% for receiving dexmedetomidine and midazolam respectively with statistical difference. However, Xiao et al [7] performed another study evaluating the postoperative delirium risk in patients who received dexmedetomidine or midazolam for postoperative mechanical ventilation sedation. They found that postoperative delirium risk between the two groups was not statistical different. These inconsistent results may be caused by weak statistical power because of the small sample size of each study.

In this meta-analysis, we investigated the effects of dexmedetomidine versus midazolam on postoperative delirium in patients who received postoperative mechanical ventilation. In this study, we included six clinical trials with 386 subjects (202 in the dexmedetomidine group and 184 in the midazolam group). The postoperative delirium risk in the dexmedetomidine group was significantly lower than that of midazolam group (RR=0.20(95%CI:0.09~0.47, p<0.05)). Compared with midazolam, patients that received dexmedetomidine for postoperative mechanical ventilation sedation had less risk of developing delirium.

Dexmedetomidine is one of most used drugs for analgesia and sedation in mechanical ventilated intensive care unit (ICU) patients and was approved by the Federal Drug Adminstration (FDA) in year 1999. Dexmedetomidine is known as a highly selective α2-adrenergic receptor agonist. It can bind to transmembrane G protein-binding adrenoreceptors in brain and spinal cord tissues [16, 17]. Clinically, dexmedetomidine has the effects of analgesic and sedation without suppressing the respiratory system. So, dexmedetomidine is wildly used for postoperative mechanical ventilation sedation. And in our present meta-analysis, we also found that compared with midazolam, patients that received dexmedetomidine for postoperative mechanical ventilation sedation had less risk of developing delirium.

Several limitations were also observed in this meta-analysis. Firstly, only six studies were included in this meta-analysis. Secondly, significant statistical heterogeneity was found across the included studies which may decrease the statistical power. Thirdly, there was obvious publication bias in this meta-analysis. Because of the above limitations, well designed prospective randomized controlled trials are needed to further evaluate the delirium risk of dexmedetomidine and midazolam in patients treated with postoperative mechanical ventilation.

References

  • [1]

    Javedan H, Tulebaev S. Management of common postoperative complications: delirium[J]. Clin Geriatr Med, 2014,30(2):271-278 Web of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [2]

    Bilotta F, Lauretta MP, Borozdina A, et al. Postoperative delirium: risk factors, diagnosis and perioperative care[J]. Minerva Anestesiol, 2013,79(9):1066-1076 Google Scholar

  • [3]

    Maldonado JR, Wysong A, van der Starre PJ, et al. Dexmedetomidine and the reduction of postoperative delirium after cardiac surgery[J]. Psychosomatics, 2009,50(3):206-217 Web of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [4]

    Huachen T. Clinical efficacy of dexmedetomidine in patients received with postoperative mechanical ventilation[J]. Modern Journal of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, 2012,21(19):2093-2094Google Scholar

  • [5]

    Tao Shaoyu LW, Xiefei Q. Sedation effects of dexmedetomidine for patients received postoperative mechanical ventilation[J]. Chinese journal of critical care medicine, 2011,31(12):1103-1105 Google Scholar

  • [6]

    Wang Z. Dexmedetomidine used for patients received postoperative mechanical ventilation[D]. 2011Google Scholar

  • [7]

    Xiao Yun WY, Minna D. Sedation effects of dexmedetomidine for patients in intensive-care unit[J]. Journal of Kunming Medical University, 2013,(12):96-99 Google Scholar

  • [8]

    Gu Xianhua ZQ. Delirium risk of dexmedetomidine in patients with postoperative mechanical ventilation in ICU[J]. Zhejiang Medical Journal, 2012,34(12):1077-1079 Google Scholar

  • [9]

    Ely EW, Gautam S, Margolin R, et al. The impact of delirium in the intensive care unit on hospital length of stay[J]. Intensive Care Med, 2001,27(12):1892-1900 CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [10]

    Wang L, Seok S, Kim S, et al. The Risk Factors of Postoperative Delirium after Total Knee Arthroplasty[J]. J Knee Surg, 2016 Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • [11]

    Jiang X, Chen D, Lou Y, et al. Risk factors for postoperative delirium after spine surgery in middle- and old-aged patients[J]. Aging Clin Exp Res, 2016 Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • [12]

    Bhattacharya B, Maung A, Barre K, et al. Postoperative delirium is associated with increased intensive care unit and hospital length of stays after liver transplantation[J]. J Surg Res, 2017,207:223-228 CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • [13]

    Lin YT, Lan KM, Wang LK, et al. Incidence, risk factors, and phenomenological characteristics of postoperative delirium in patients receiving intravenous patient-controlled analgesia: a prospective cohort study[J]. Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat, 2016,12:3205-3212 Web of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [14]

    Jo YY, Lee D, Jung WS, et al. Comparison of Intravenous Dexmedetomidine and Midazolam for Bispectral Index-Guided Sedation During Spinal Anesthesia[J]. Med Sci Monit, 2016,22:3544-3551CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [15]

    Chun EH, Han MJ, Baik HJ, et al. Dexmedetomidine-ketamine versus Dexmedetomidine-midazolam-fentanyl for monitored anesthesia care during chemoport insertion: a Prospective Randomized Study[J]. BMC Anesthesiol, 2016,16(1):49 Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • [16]

    Huupponen E, Maksimow A, Lapinlampi P, et al. Electroencephalogram spindle activity during dexmedetomidine sedation and physiological sleep[J]. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand, 2008,52(2):289-294 CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • [17]

    Guo TZ, Jiang JY, Buttermann AE, et al. Dexmedetomidine injection into the locus ceruleus produces antinociception[J]. Anesthesiology, 1996,84(4):873-881 CrossrefGoogle Scholar

About the article

Tel: +86 022-65665663


Received: 2017-01-18

Accepted: 2017-06-13

Published Online: 2017-08-10


Conflict of interestConflict of interest statement: Authors state no conflict of interest


Citation Information: Open Medicine, Volume 12, Issue 1, Pages 252–256, ISSN (Online) 2391-5463, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/med-2017-0036.

Export Citation

© 2017 Wang Peng et al.. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License. BY-NC-ND 3.0

Citing Articles

Here you can find all Crossref-listed publications in which this article is cited. If you would like to receive automatic email messages as soon as this article is cited in other publications, simply activate the “Citation Alert” on the top of this page.

[1]
D. Bolkenius, C. Dumps, and E. Halbeck
Der Anaesthesist, 2018

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in